|
|
|
| |
| | | |
Working conditions and industrial relations
| | | |
Chapter 13
The Printing Press and its Staff1.
Having dealt with all the material and technical aspects of the Plantin house attention should now be given to the people who did the actual work. The compositors and the pressmen, the two principal categories of workmen, have already been encountered. The tasks they had to carry out have been outlined in the words of the Dialogues françois et flamands, in those of Joseph Moxon in his Mechanick Exercises - more precisely and in greater detail - and in the fairly full descriptions in the Encydopédie française and similar works of reference. All these sources have been quoted from rather extensively and the author feels no compulsion to do so again. However, the social and working conditions of the little world of the Plantinian press should be looked at, and also the relationships of the masters of the Golden Compasses to that world.
The chief sources are the wages accounts and the house rulings that were drawn up from time to time, together with the documents relating to the working of the firm's ‘chapel’ or ‘union’.
The wages accounts were divided into the livres des ouvriers and the semaines des ouvriers. In the livres2. the work accomplished by each man
| | | | was noted and the wages paid for it entered. In the semaines the weekly wages of the various workmen were entered up each week, without further specification of the work done. The first series runs from 1563 to 1684. The second series was not started until 1583 but it continued until the end of the eighteenth century. This means that there are only livres des ouvriers for the period to 1583; both series for 1583 to 1684; and semaines des ouvriers from 1684 on only. The livres des ouvriers are by far the most important for working conditions in the firm, and these are available for the whole of Plantin's time.
The ordinances, which began in 1555 and ended in the eighteenth century, and the documents of the Plantinian workpeople's association1. are not only of extreme importance to the subject under discussion but are unique for the Renaissance and Baroque periods. Knowledge of industrial conditions in Western Europe in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries is mainly based on fragmentary and usually very one-sided information, derived from central or local authorities who intervened to pronounce judgment or arbitrate in disputes. So far as the author knows, the records of the Officina Plantiniana are the only ones that allow the relationships within a large capitalist enterprise to be studied from the inside, and this for a period of two whole centuries.
| |
| | | |
The compositors
The compositors' work consisted of setting texts. They arranged the lead type into lines in their composing sticks and assembled these into pages on the galleys. When a number of pages were ready these were assembled in a forme.
Paper was printed on both sides (‘work and turn’ or ‘sheetwise forme’ as it is called) so that two formes were needed for each sheet of paper. The number of pages in the formes depended on the format chosen. The sheet was folded in two for a folio volume, the two formes each having two pages of set type. A quarto volume meant folding the sheet in four, four pages to each forme - and so on through the various formats discussed in Chapter 6. Positioning the pages in the formes (the ‘imposition’) was and is an art. Page two of a text cannot be placed beside page one, for when printed and bound, page two has to be over the page from page one. They have therefore to be placed in different formes. But even the pages of work and turn do not follow each other in consecutive order. Their sequence depends on the number of times the sheet is to be folded and
| | | | in what way, and this is determined of course by format. Each format therefore has its own mode of imposition.1.
Besides this task of assemblage there was one of taking apart. The set text, after it had been printed, had to be distributed (‘dissed’) by the type-setters, that is to say the type put back in the appropriate compartments of the type-cases. Between setting and distribution there came the work of correcting any errors spotted by the proof-readers.
The ordinances give relatively few specific details of the compositors' tasks. One aspect - the prompt delivery of the formes - will be discussed later, as it also involved the pressmen.2. Exhortations to handle materials carefully and to put them back after use were included in every ordinance,3. an incessant campaign being waged against negligence. The rules of 1555-56 instructed the compositors to gather up any dropped type before leaving work on Saturdays. By 1563 they were being told to do this twice a day (at twelve noon and again before finishing for the day). Anyone who left more than six pieces lying around was fined. In the 1715 rules it was thought sufficient to order this to be done once a day, before going home for the midday meal. The same 1715 set of rules admonished the compositors to distribute type after printing that might soon be needed for new work ‘for otherwise one piece will become old (worn) while the other remains new’.
Rather more interesting is the remark made in the 1563 rules that the compositor who was the last to finish his part of the work must carry ‘both’ proofs to the reader. This must mean that at that time two compositors worked on one text, one making up the forme for the recto side of the sheet, the other being responsible for the verso. The wages accounts of the period generally support this: exceptions4.
| | | | did occur, but the rule was that one type-setter did only one forme per sheet.1.
It was normal in small and medium-sized firms for two compositors to operate in this way on a continuous text. The pressmen printed work and turn immediately after each other and usually on the same day. To make correction possible under this arrangement, the proof-reader had to be able to look through front and back pages together. To feed the press the inner and outer formes had to be handed over virtually at the same time. This presupposes that another tricky matter was attended to first, namely the accurate indication of the pagination on the copy from which the compositors worked.2. It can be assumed that it was the compositors themselves who marked up a text in this way.3.
One of the reasons why the house rules have nothing to say about pagination is probably that it soon ceased to be a very important or difficult part of the routine. As soon as his business began to expand Plantin was able to rationalize the process. The wages accounts show that from about 1565 onwards each compositor regularly made up the two formes for a sheet and often worked straight through a whole series of sheets. Naturally this reduced the chances of overlapping to a minimum. This kind of solution was a council of perfection for all but large concerns such as the Officina Plantiniana had become, where the number of presses and of staff enabled the work to be shared out in this more rational way. It is clear from Moxon that smaller firms continued in the old way with two compositors to one sheet. Never- | | | | theless even after this simplification, problems of pagination and general arrangement of work still arose in the Plantin press, so that copy had to be carefully looked through and marked up where necessary. At all events in the eighteenth century the compositors received a substantial bonus, which practically doubled the rates paid for setting, for the ‘voorbladers’ - the first sheets of a new edition, which probably meant the composing of specimen pages for the new book and perhaps also the marking up of the copy: either manuscript or an already printed text.1.
There is another technical matter on which the ordinances have nothing to record, namely the ‘black-and-red’ or liturgical editions. It should be pointed out, however, that at first this was more the concern of the pressmen and therefore belongs to the discussion of their tasks.2. It was not until the end of the seventeenth century that the compositors became involved through the introduction of ‘high’ and ‘low’ type.
Plantinian compositors were paid piece rates, based on the number of formes that they completed. The rates presumably allowed for the distributing of type after printing, although the author has found no specific mention of this; probably because it was taken for granted. The compositors' work could vary greatly from forme to forme. Many more hours were required to set the twenty-four pages of the forme for a 24mo book in very small nonpareille than the two pages of the forme for a folio in a large ascendonica. A Greek or Hebrew text demanded much more time and concentration than one of similar length in a roman or italic. Indexes, marginalia, and interlinear matter also took much more time than ordinary continuous text.
These factors were taken into account in fixing piece rates, so wages varied considerably; they were also adjusted through the years to the rising cost of living. Extra pay for other reasons was sometimes recorded. The 1563 rules stipulate that there would be extra money for corrections of more than three words and six letters not included in the original copy. In one instance a bonus was paid to the men
| | | | who had had to set from a barely legible manuscript.1. Bonuses were also offered as incentives to the speedy execution of urgent work.2. The table on pp. 316-317 contains information on this subject.
This raises the question of how long it took a compositor to complete a forme. The fact that the payments per forme fluctuated so greatly shows plainly that the hours bestowed on the task varied accordingly. It is therefore impossible to give averages for this category of worker, only an approximation of the rate based on a few actual instances. In 1563 Corneille Muller made up an average of 2½ formes of a 16mo Virgil in a week of six working days. On one occasion he managed three.3. This means that he required a little over two days for one forme. He was paid 1 fl. 10 st. and 1 fl. 16 st. a week for his work: 5 to 6 stuivers per day. This would have been a rather low rate. In 1569 Jean Strien completed 22 formes of Lipsius's Variae Lectiones in quarto in five weeks (30 working days - 4 formes in the first week, 6 in the second and 12 during the following 3 weeks).4. At 8 st. per forme he was paid a wage of 8 fl. 16 st., rather less than 6 st. per day. This too was a fairly low rate of pay. In 1571 Hans Han did three formes of the Lexicon Syrochaldaicum in one week: one forme in two days.5. This was a particularly difficult piece of work, paid at a rate of 1 fl. 6 st. per forme, so for that week the compositor received a wage of 3 fl. 18 st., or 13 st. per day - good money for the time. In February 1565 Plantin concluded an agreement with Laurent Soter: ‘Accordé avec ledit qu'il fera tous les 3 jours une forme en Hebrieu de la Bible in - 4o.’ He was paid 1 fl. 15 st. per forme and from 10th March until 26th August of that year he earned the respectable sum of 3 fl. a week.6.
| | | |
Wages paid to compositors per forme1.
| 1558 |
Diurnale |
10 st. and 12 st.2. |
| |
‘Journal’, 24mo (in nonpareille) |
15 st.3. |
| 1563-65 |
Virgil, 16mo |
12 st.4. |
| |
Hebrew Bible, quarto |
1 fl. 15 st.5. |
| 1568-696. |
H. Junius, Emblemata, octavo |
6 st. |
| |
G. Lindanus, Apologeticum, quarto (foreword) |
6 st. |
| |
G. Lindanus, Apologeticum, quarto (text) |
7 st. |
| |
J. Sambucus, Emblemata, 16mo |
8 st. |
| |
J. Lipsius, Variae Lectiones, octavo |
8 st. |
| |
C. Gemma, Cyclognomina, quarto |
12 st. |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo |
18 st. |
| 1571-72 |
Parts of Polyglot Bible, folio: Lexicon Syrochaldaicum |
1 fl. 6 st.7. |
| |
Novum Testamentum Graecum-Latinum |
1 fl. 18 sr.8. |
| |
Biblia Pagnini |
1 fl. 2 st.9. |
| | | |
| 1582-831. |
Pontus Heuterus, Burgundica, folio |
9½ st. |
| |
Ovid, quarto |
1 fl. 2 st. |
| |
Biblia Hebraica, quarto |
1 fl. 12 st. |
| |
Biblia Latina, octavo (nonpareille) |
2 fl. 14 st. |
| |
Concordantiae, quarto |
3 fl. |
| |
|
|
| Eighteenth century2. |
|
| |
Missale Romanum, folio maximo |
1 fl. 6 st. |
| |
Missale Romanum, folio parvo |
1 fl. 6 st. (2 fl. 12 st.) |
| |
Missale Romanum, quarto |
2 fl. 15 st. (5 fl. 10 st.) |
| |
Missale Romanum, octavo |
4 fl. 10 st. (9 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, folio |
2 fl. 8 st. |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (1 vol.) |
3 fl. 15 st. (7 fl. 10 st.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (2 vols.) |
2 fl. 15 st. |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (4 vols.) |
2 fl. 10 st. (5 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo (1 vol.) |
7 fl. (14 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo (2 vols.) |
5 fl. 10 st. (11 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo (4 vols.) |
5fl. (10 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, 12mo (1 vol.) |
11 fl. 3 st. (14 fl. 3 st.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, 12mo (4 vols.) |
7 fl. (14 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, 18mo (4 vols.) |
12 fl. 5 st. |
These figures confirm what can be deduced from a comparison of the wages of the compositors and pressmen. It will be seen below that the latter earned an average of 7 st. per day. The figures for annual pay show that the compositors usually received more than
| | | | this.1. As the rate for normal formes was 6 to 8 st. it would seem that with a text of average difficulty a compositor could complete one forme per day.
| |
The pressmen
With the words ‘The forme made up in this way is handed over to the two printers who operate the press’ the writer of the Dialogues françois et flamands turned his attention from setting to printing. A press was normally worked by two men in Plantin's establishment and in all the other printing offices of Europe during the period under discussion. It could happen that one man had to operate a press by himself for some considerable time, in which case it was regarded for accounting purposes as half a press.2. Usually, however, a journeyman was only left to work a press by himself during the temporary absence of his mate.
The two men divided the work between them. One saw to the inking of the formes; this included getting the ink ready in the container, applying the ink to the ink balls and ‘striking’ (as Moxon termed it) the ink balls on the forme. His mate did the actual printing, placing the sheets of paper, sliding in the coffin, working the lever, pulling out the coffin, lifting off the printed sheets, and laying them on the pile. Before the actual printing the paper had to be moistened (preferably the day before), the ink balls had to be prepared (these were stuffed with wool and covered with leather), and the formes had to be locked up. After printing the formes were unlocked and washed in warm lye. When starting on a new book it might be necessary for the frisket to be trimmed to size.
| | | |
Instructions and advice for these tasks were given in the various ordinances. In 1555 this was still in fairly general terms: the men should not discard any leather from the ink balls that was still in good condition; they should not waste ink; they should cover the ink container on leaving work on Saturday evenings. The 1563 rules said that spaces and quadrats should be pressed down carefully, burring and dirt should be avoided, and in all respects clean work should be the aim. On one point the instructions were more particular. If type was displaced or broken during printing, the journeyman printer was to replace it himself, unless he could get the compositor to do it for him.1.
The regulations of 1715 were the most detailed of all and were probably compiled to remedy specific bad practices.2. They laid down that formes should be unlocked after printing proofs when corrections had to be made;3. they recommended that paper should not be made too wet;4. advice was given about washing formes in the warm lye;5. the use of ink,6. the operating of the lever,7. the covering of the tympan with linen,8. and making the ink balls;9. the men were instructed to
| | | | clean the presses every Saturday, especially the platen and spindle, and to keep the rest of the equipment clean.1.
According to Moxon it was the rule for the man who did the inking partially to undo the leather on the ink balls and leave it to soak in a bowl of water during his midday break.2. The section dealing with ink balls in the 1715 rules shows there was a similar practice in the Officina Plantiniana - or at least that the master expected this to be done.3.
Between making up the formes and printing came the intricate operation of correction which required the co-operation of pressmen and compositors, as well as the efforts of the proof-reader. Nowadays proofs are usually pulled on a special proof press and corrected on the galleys. In the period under discussion here, the general practice was to correct in the forme. This was more difficult, because the forme was locked up for each proof and unlocked for every correction - a tricky and time-consuming task. All the same this was better than the risk of making a hash of laboriously set lead type: composed matter consisting of loose sorts is unpleasantly liable to fall apart at the least provocation. Correcting on the galley presumably did not come in until the nineteenth century, with the advent of mechanical presses.4.
In this period proofs were printed on an ordinary press. The procedure seems to have been for the compositor to hand over the locked-up forme to the pressmen who pulled a proof. The forme was returned and placed on the imposing stone for any corrections.
| | | |

(71) Opposite: Page from the ‘livre des ouvriers’, 1563-67, with the amounts 01 work done by and the wages paid to the compositor Cornelis Tol from the end of 1563 to the end of 1565. The ‘livres des ouvriers’ are not only interesting for revealing the work rates of the Plantinian compositors and pressmen, but also for particulars of how the various books were dealt with. However, the often abbreviated entries make interpretation difficult.
| | | |

(72) (72) Opposite: One of the ordinances of the Plantin press (Folio Varia 9: R. 63.8) drawn up to ensure orderliness and smooth running. It was printed in civilité type at the end of 1563. This copy was signed by all the compositors and pressmen then working in the Officina.
| | | |
After correcting the forme was handed back to the pressman for another proof and so on until the work was deemed ready for the pressman to lock up for the definitive printing. This meant that the press in question was immobilized for a considerable time, which reduced the rate of production. According to Moxon, in many printing shops one press was specially reserved for the pulling of proofs.1.
A similar mode of working may be assumed for the Plantin press. In the various ordinances it was always the journeymen printers who were responsible for proofs.2. It has been seen that in the 1715 rules they were advised to unlock the formes for this operation.3. The inventory of 17454. mentions correction stones.5. There was a proof press in the Plantinian printing office at least from 1621, for in that year it was decreed that anyone who borrowed the lye-brush from the proof press should return it immediately after use.6. Presumably this press was used exclusively for this particular function.7.
A sheet of paper is printed on both sides. This ‘work and turn’ has already been mentioned in connexion with the compositors. The art was to obtain a perfect register when backing up, so that the pages on one side of the sheet corresponded exactly with those on the other. This meant that the tympan and frisket had to be as near true as possible, that the forme for the back had to be placed down in exactly the same place as that for the front and that the sheets of
| | | | paper had to be fastened on the same pins. But the shrinking of the paper as it dried introduced another factor which could not be allowed for by mathematical or mechanical means; the pressman had to have an instinct for it.
‘Work and turn’ for an ordinary edition was child's play compared with printing a black-and-red service book. There were various methods which could be employed. According to McKerrow1. the most usual procedure in the sixteenth century, at least in England, was as follows: a frisket was cut so that the sorts that had to print red were left exposed. These were then inked and the whole run printed. After this the red letters were removed and replaced by quads and the sheets laid on the press again to take the black text. In practice the frisket did not always prevent the black text from being smeared with red ink. In 1683-84 Moxon described a somewhat improved method. In this the black was printed first, the red sorts being removed and replaced by quads. The entire run was printed and the red sorts were put back in the forme on pieces of paper or card so that they protruded slightly. The red text was printed and in this method too the frisket was cut so that only the red sorts were exposed.2. In his commentary on this procedure McKerrow remarks: ‘Substantially the difference in the processes is no more than the underlaying of the red and the printing of black first. Why they should not have underlayed the red at once and printed it first, thus saving themselves the trouble of inserting it a second time, I do not understand but they seem not to have done so.’ They did in fact, at least on the Continent. The Encyclopédie française in 1767 describes the same method as Moxon, except that the red was printed first. While dealing with the use of pieces of paper to raise the red sorts, the author notes in passing, ‘Dans les imprimeries où l'on fait souvent des livres d'église, et autres où cette impression est plus usitée, il y a des caractères plus
hauts destinés à cet usage.’
This raises the question of the method or methods used in the
| | | | Plantinian printing office. Examination of a number of service books has led the present author to conclude that from the beginning the red parts of text were printed first. The procedure described by Moxon and criticized by McKerrow seems never to have been practised in the Plantin press.1. Whether the fairly primitive method outlined by McKerrow or the improved process of the Encyclopédie française was followed in the early days cannot be established. The quality of the work and the fact that red smudges or streaks hardly ever appear suggest that the practice of using underlays must have been the rule quite early on, in Plantin's time.
Then in about 1680, or possibly a little earlier, a further refinement - that mentioned in passing in the Encylopédie française and described, above in Chapter 4 was introduced: ‘high’ type for the red text and ‘low’ type for the black.2. In their printing techniques the Low Countries give the impression of having been well ahead of their neighbours in this period.
The nineteenth century must have brought another change. A memorandum written in 1828 mentions 26 packets of newly cast ‘high’ sorts ‘but not used for this because of the new manner of printing red’.3. It has not been possible to discover what this new method was. Later Moretus editions would seem to indicate that the black was now printed first, with far less squabbled type than formerly and a truly remarkable regularity and accuracy.
However, whatever method was adopted for printing service books, every sheet went on to the press four times: twice for the front, twice for the back. Special care had to be taken even in ordinary editions to get the two sides of the sheet in register; service books required
| | | | twice and three times as much trouble. They were the most difficult kind of printing then known to the trade - and from the second half of the seventeenth century onwards, they were practically the only works issued by the Officina Plantiniana.
It is necessary now to consider the relationship of the two pressmen - the one who inked and the one who operated the press - to each other and to their work. Moxon describes the division of their labours thus:1. ‘The one they distinguish by the name of First, the other his Second... The first is he that has wrought longest at that Press... Generally the Master Printer reposes the greatest trust upon his care and curiosity for good Work; although both are equally liable to perform it.’ The two journeymen printers had to know how to perform all the operations and to take their turn at them, but one was a little higher in status and responsible for the press.
This was also the arrangement in the Plantinian printing office from its foundation, with a ‘premier’ or ‘master’ and a ‘second’ to each press. In the early years the second usually earned only ½ st. less per day than his mate.2. This implies that the second had to be familiar with all operations and - as Moxon implies - able to carry them out skilfully, but the ordinances stipulated that the ‘master of the press’ was responsible for the press and should also carry out the more delicate tasks.3.
Like the compositors the pressmen did piece work, being paid for according to the number of sheets they printed per day. In contrast with setting, printing was not conditioned by the size or
| | | | variety of type. A forme set in a very small type or in Greek or Hebrew could be printed just as quickly as a folio sheet in a large roman type. Only service books with their black and red were a different proposition: it has been seen that every forme had to go under the press twice and needed to be printed with great care. However, the number of sheets printed from each forme varied, depending on the number of copies the printer-publisher wanted to issue of a particular work: the run as it is termed was the main criterion for fixing the wages of the pressmen.1. Within this delimitation there was little variation, as may be seen in the table on pp. 327-328.
It was almost impossible to convert the work done by the compositors into average daily wages. The piece rates paid the pressmen on the contrary could be calculated on the basis of a daily norm, because of the greater regularity and uniformity of their work. That norm was 1,250 feuilles, sans les imperfections, that is to say, usable sheets, excluding wastage.2. In the text from which this is quoted, Plantin originally wrote ‘2,500’ but crossed this out: a small mistake that he made no doubt through thinking of the number of formes, or the two sides to every sheet. Whereas compositors were paid per forme, the pressmen were paid per sheet, i.e., two formes3. - always remembering of course that there were two men to be paid, not one. If the edition was of fewer than 1,250 copies, less was paid per sheet, but the men
| | | | were able to make this up by printing off more than one run per day.1. As far as possible the piece rates for printing the varying runs of different works were reduced to a highest common factor that ensured average daily earnings on the basis of 1,250 sheets per day.2. If the daily norm was exceeded, a higher wage was paid on a pro rata basis.3.
The two pressmen at each press were thus expected to produce 1,250 sheets each day, printed on both sides. In twelve working hours4. this meant an average of three to four sheets a minute. It must be remembered that this daily average had to include all the attendant activities, which could take up quite a lot of time: wetting the paper, preparing ink, getting ink balls ready, locking up and unlocking the formes and washing the formes in lye. To keep their earnings up to the daily average, the pressmen had to work at a feverish pace, straining nerve and sinew in veritably stakhanovite fashion - even if the term had not been thought of then. Good pressmen were even able to exceed the norm and thereby earn welcome extra stuivers.5.
6.
| | | |
Wages paid to the pressmen, per sheet (i.e. two formes)1.
| 1563 |
Virgil, 16mo, 1,000 copies 6½ st. (second 6 st.)2.
2,500 copies 16 st. (second 15½ st.) |
| 1564 |
Horace, 16mo, 1,250 copies 8 st. (second 7½ st.)3. |
| |
Thomas a Veiga, Commentarii in Galeni Opera, folio, 800 copies 5 st.4. |
| 1566 |
J. Sambucus, Emblemata, octavo, 800 copies 8 st.5. |
| 1569 |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo, 1,250 copies 1 fl. 4 st.6. |
| 1571 |
Antiphonary, folio, 500 copies 8½ st.7. |
| |
Lexicon Pagnini, folio, 1,500 copies 12 st.8. |
| 1582-839. |
| |
Biblia Hebraica, quarto, 1,250 copies 9 st. |
| |
Pontus Heuterus, Burgundica, folio, 1,250 copies 9 st. |
| |
Ovid, 16mo, 1,500 copies 12 st. |
| |
Biblia Latina, octavo [nonpareille], 2,500 copies 1 fl. 6 st. |
| |
Concordantiae, quarto, 2,500 copies 1 fl. 14 st. |
| Eighteenth century:10. |
| |
Missale Romanum, folio maximo, 1,530 copies 7 fl. |
| |
Missale Romanum, folio parvo, 3,075 copies 11 fl. (12 fl.) |
| |
Missale Romanum, quarto, 3,075 copies 13 fl. 10 st. (14 fl. 10 st.)
2,050 copies 9 fl. 10 st. (10 fl. 10 st.) |
| |
Missale Romanum, octavo, 2,050 copies 10 fl. (11 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, folio, 2,050 copies 10 fl. 10 st. (11 fl. 10 st.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (1 vol.), 2,050 copies 9 fl. 10 st. (10 fl. 10 st.) |
| | | |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (2 vols.2, 2,050 copies 8 fl. (9 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, quarto (4 vols.2, 2,050 copies 8 fl. (9 fl.) |
| |
Breviarium Romanum, octavo (1 vol.), 3,075 copies 16 fl.
4,100 copies 20 fl. |
These figures do not apply to the black-and-red service books. For these the daily average for work done was lower and the piece rate higher. This did not mean that conditions were vastly different for men working on these editions. In a couple of letters Plantin quotes the figure of 1,000 as the average daily rate for service books.1. The wages accounts show that this meant 1,000 sides, not sheets.2. However, as each side had to be printed twice, this was the equivalent of 1,000 sheets in an ordinary edition: 250 sheets a day less than for the latter category, but the lower rate of production was more than offset by the much greater care that had to be taken over the work. Piece rates for service books were, consequently, often expressed in formes rather than sheets.
| |
The collators
When the sheets had been printed and arranged in piles, a new figure took over. He was called an assembleur in French and a vergaerder in Dutch. The collator was only occasionally mentioned in the ordinances, and then only in connexion with his hours of work.3. He is only once referred to in the rules drawn up by the Plantinian chapel, and from these it appears that he was responsible for sweeping up the
| | | | printing shop.1. He was a lowly member of the staff and had no place in their chapel. His work was less difficult than that of his colleagues, but still required a measure of care and deftness.
After the pressmen had finished their work, the sheets from which the book was to be made up were stacked neatly in piles, but these piles consisted of identical sheets. The task of the collator, besides a number of odd jobs he had to perform, was to fold these sheets and arrange them in the right order (gather them) to make up the requisite number of complete copies.
The first entry for a collator in the livres des ouvriers was on 17th July 1568, when Henri Parent started work at the Plantin press.2. Thereafter, this category of workman appears fairly regularly in the wages accounts, although there are periods without any entries for them. This does not mean that there were no ‘regular’ collators3. at work in the Plantin press before 1568, or that the firm managed without them for varying intervals after that date, but simply that it was not always thought necessary to enter the amounts paid them in the ordinary accounts. This also happened with the bookshop assistants, possibly for the same reason: their wages were much more regular than those of the compositors and pressmen and were paid directly out of the till.4.
The collators' task required little training: they were regarded, and paid, as unskilled labour. Henri Parent earned an average of 3 to 3½ st. per day, roughly half the rate for a compositor or pressman. On 12th November 1569 Plantin agreed to take on Henri's son Michel in the same capacity, paying him 3 st. a day, and 3½ st. from the following Christmas until after Lent. Plantin also agreed to accept the lad as an apprentice should there be an opening, in which case
| | | | he would receive 4 st. a day ‘according to our custom’.1. This meant that a collator was paid less than an apprentice printer.
The collator's pay was fairly steady and amounted almost to a fixed wage. In 1580-81 Pieter Berten was receiving 3½ st. per day, more or less the same as Henri Parent and his son in 1569.2. However, it is possible that the collators daily wage could also be regarded as a piece rate that had become standardized in the course of time and that, to earn their money, these workers had to collate a certain number of sheets as well as carry out their various other small tasks.3.
This, in any event, was the case with some workmen hired in 1565 for doing this particular job on a temporary basis - though without receiving the qualification of ‘collator’.4. In January of that year Louis Elsevier5. and two others were paid ½ st. for every ream they arranged in order. In one week the three managed to collate 52, 53, and 54 reams respectively, earning therefore 1 fl. 6 st., 1 fl. 6½ st., and 1 fl. 7 st. From the end of the month onwards, Plantin merely entered Louis Elsevier's name - the others were not mentioned again - with a daily wage of 4½ st., that is to say 1 fl. 7 st. a week. This money would have been ensured by what must then have been the average rate: 54 reams per week.6.
Henri Parent, Pieter Berten, and others of this category of workman who appeared later, usually received less, so presumably they did not get through so much work, either because they were less experienced or because they were not urged to increase their tempo. Extra hands could always be hired when necessary, who generally earned more by
| | | | their exertions than the regulars.1. From time to time apprentices, or even regular journeymen, were also roped in for this task,2. whilst the shop assistants were supposed to assist the collators in their spare time.3.
Worthy of note is the fact that in 1583 to 1584 the collator Merten Gilles was assisted by this daughter.4. This is the only instance the author has come across of a woman in the essentially masculine world of the Plantinian printing shop during the three centuries of its operation.
| |
The ‘gouverneur’
In the ordinance of 1715 another category of workman appears, designated as the gouverneur. The duty assigned him was not as impressive as his title might suggest, and consisted of inspecting the compositors' type-cases once a month.5. This was also specified as one of the tasks in the undated ‘Rule for the type-setter in the type-room of the Plantinian press’.6. The gouverneur and the ‘type-setter in the type-room’ were one and the same, and identical with the ‘gouverneur des caracterès fondus’ entered in the wages sheets from 1571 onwards.
| | | | He was a compositor who according to the 1715 rules was specially charged with taking care of types and wood-blocks. He had to issue materials to the other compositors and if necessary to the printers, and check and store them when returned. If he had any time left, he was to set texts ‘always in the type-room and not in the printing shop’.1. Part of his responsibility for the founts of type consisted of seeing that the other compositors handled their expensive material with due care, ‘dissed’ the type promptly, kept the type-cases clean, and so on. All this, however, was incidental to his main function, for the gouverneur was not a foreman, nor was he the prote so familiar from the French literature, the master's right-hand man and deputy. In fact he was the chief storeman.
The compositor Jan Pasch was the first to be given the title, in 1571, although he had probably been doing the job for some time previously. He had entered Plantin's service as a compositor on 30th January 1564.2. Until the beginning of October 1567 he was paid piece rates for setting texts.3. On 18th October of that year he received 2 fl. ‘pour 4 iournées à racoustrer les lectres’. From then on he was paid a fixed wage, beginning at 10 st. per day (3 fl. per six-day week). This was raised on 30th October 1568 to 3 fl. 5 st. per week, and again in July 1569 to 4 fl.4. When Plantin started a new livre des ouvriers in 1571 the first entry was Jan Pasch, now designated as ‘gouverneur des caracteres fondues’5. so that the title simply confirmed a situation that had existed since October 1567.6. His pay remained at 4 fl. a week. Adriaan van de Velde, who succeeded Pasch on 9th May 1572, received the same rate at first, but from 8th November 1572 his wage was reduced to 3 fl. a week.7.
| | | |
A good compositor at this time could earn 3 fl. and sometimes even 4 fl. a week. Jan Pasch himself achieved 3 fl. 4 st. in some weeks in 1565 and even reached 4 fl. 6 st. a few times. Such peaks, however, alternated with weeks in which his earnings were very much lower. In the period 1565-67 Pasch was among the highest paid workmen in the firm, but even in his best year, 1565, his total wage was only 159 fl. 11 st., and in 1566 and 1567 the totals were 131 fl. and 137 fl. 7½ st. respectively. His income for 1568 cannot be calculated with any certainty. In 1569 (in the first half he was earning 3 fl. 5 st. per week; 4 fl. weekly in the second half) his total for the year rose to 182 fl. and in 1570 it increased to 200 fl. 5 st. These are the highest figures the author has discovered for the period and they show that the gouverneur with his rates of between 10 st. and 13½ st. per day was the best-paid workman in the press. Although he was not actually in charge of his workmates, his responsibility and his wages were greater; he was in fact first among equals.1.
| |
The relationship between compositors and pressmen
The activities of the compositors and pressmen in the Officina Plantiniana have been discussed and it is now necessary to consider the relationship of the two categories one to the other, first with regard to their numbers. The total number of men employed obviously depended on how busy the press was - it was naturally bigger in 1574-75, when Plantin had fifteen presses working, than in leaner years. The ratio of pressmen to compositors, however, was determined by the productivity of the latter. The number of formes that they could get ready in a given time varied greatly according to the nature of the work in hand, but it seems reasonable to assume that for fairly straightforward assignments the tempo would have been one forme per day. In normal circumstances (that is to say a run of 1,250 copies of a non-liturgical edition) printing one of these formes would have taken half a day. In theory, two compositors were therefore needed to keep one press supplied with work. As there
| | | | were two pressmen to each press the numbers of the two types of workmen were generally equal,1. but with a slight preponderance of compositors when viewed over the whole period. The ratio was different for liturgical books, the rate of printing being reduced by more than half.2. This meant that a single compositor could then feed a press operated by two pressmen. Thus the ratio of compositors to pressmen fluctuated according to the extent to which production was concentrated on liturgical or ordinary editions, as shown in the table on p. 335.
The figures confirm that in Plantin's early years, when the firm was producing mostly ordinary works, compositors slightly outnumbered pressmen. But from 1568 onwards, when service books began to preponderate, the relative number of compositors began to fall and by 1576 they represented not much more than half that of the pressmen. After 1576 Plantin returned to non-liturgical editions and the relative number of compositors rose again. From 1585 the importance of black-and-red editions increased once more and in the second half of the seventeenth century specialization in service books caused the ratio of compositors to sink again to that of the late 1560s and 1570s.
The compositors' work required deftness and a certain amount of mental effort. The pressmen had to be similarly skilful with their hands, but intense physical effort was the chief requirement of their task. This raises the question of how the two activities were compared with each other when it came to wages. Both groups were paid piece rates, which makes comparison difficult. In both there were good and less good workers, their earnings above or below the norm for their own or the other group. In the case of the pressmen, the ‘premier’ and the ‘second’ were entered separately in the wages accounts until 1580. In that year the latter category disappeared and
| | | |
Pressmen and compositors in the Officina Plantiniana, 1564-891.
| Year |
Number of presses |
Pressmen |
Compositors |
| 1564 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
| 1565 |
5 |
9 |
11 |
| 1566 |
7 |
14 |
16 |
| 1567 |
5 |
8 |
9 |
| 1568 |
6 |
10 |
9 |
| 1569 |
10 |
16 |
12 |
| 1570 |
9 |
18 |
16 |
| 1571 |
11 |
20 |
17 |
| 1572 |
13 |
23 |
23 |
| 1573 |
12 |
24 |
17 |
| 1574 |
16 |
32 |
20 |
| 1575 |
15 |
27 |
20 |
| 1576 |
15 |
30 |
19 |
| 1577 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
| 1578 |
6 |
9 |
10 |
| 1579 |
5 |
9 |
9 |
| 1580 |
7 |
12 |
13 |
| 1581 |
8 |
14 |
10 |
| 1582 |
7 |
12 |
14 |
| 1583 |
10 |
17 |
15 |
| 1584 |
6 |
11 |
13 |
| 1585 |
6 |
9 |
7 |
| 1586 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
| 1587 |
6 |
10 |
7 |
| 1588 |
6 |
11 |
9 |
| 1589 |
4 |
7 |
7 |
the wages entered for the ‘premier’ practically doubled:2. even if the number-one man at each press did not actually receive the double wage-packet, this is how it was shown in the books. Henceforth in the accounts it is only possible to find out approximately the pressmen's wages by dividing by two, without being able to determine
| | | | the slight difference in earnings between ‘premier’ and ‘second’. This mode of accounting was retained by the Moretuses.
A comparison of yearly wages earned by compositors and pressmen between 1564 and 1587 is given on pp. 336-338.
A few bachelors among the workmen found it more convenient to lodge with their employer: the author has found just four names for Plantin's time. There were two kinds of arrangement. In one, the workmen paid about 50 fl. per year for board and lodging and received a normal wage.1. In the other case the employer paid for the board and lodging and then gave the employees a wage that can be taken as the difference between his costs and their earnings.2.
Annual wages of pressmen and compositors in the Plantinian press3.
| Year |
‘Gouverneur’ |
Compositors |
Pressmen |
| 1564 |
- |
- |
N. Sterck (premier)
96 fl. 14 st. |
| 1565 |
- |
J. Pasch
159 fl. 11 st. |
N. Sterck (premier)
124 fl. 16 st. |
| |
|
H. Alsens
68 fl. 13 st. |
L. Hallin (second)
111 fl. 8¾ st. |
| 1566 |
- |
J. Pasch
131 fl. |
N. Sterck
142 fl. 2½ st. |
| |
|
H. Alsens
80 fl. 19 st. |
L. Hallin
76 fl. 3 st.4. |
| | | |
| Year |
‘Gouverneur’ |
Compositors |
Pressmen |
| 1567 |
- |
J. Pasch
137 fl. 7½ st. |
- |
| 1569 |
J. Pasch
182 fl. |
- |
- |
| 1570 |
J. Pasch
200 fl. 5 st. |
- |
- |
| 1571 |
- |
J. de Meersman
119 fl. 17 st. |
J. van Horen
157 fl. 18 st.1. |
| |
|
C. Tol
122 fl. 4 st. |
C. van Linschoten
157 fl. 3 st. |
| 1573 |
- |
- |
G. Rivière
150 fl. 6 st. |
| 1574 |
|
- |
G. Rivière
157 fl. 10½ st. |
| 1575 |
- |
- |
G. Rivière
145 fl. 5¾ st. |
| 1576 |
- |
H. Coismans
146 fl. 6 st. |
G. Rivière
136 fl. 8 st. |
| 1577 |
|
H. Coismans
113 fl. 13 st. |
G. Rivière
117 fl. 3½ st. |
| 1578 |
- |
H. Coismans
106 fl. 17 st. |
G. Rivière
118 fl. 15¼ st. |
| 1579 |
- |
H. Coismans
114 fl. 19 st. |
G. Rivière
177 fl. 19 ½ st./2 = approx. 88 fl. 19¾ st. |
| 1580 |
- |
H. Coismans
162 fl. |
G. Rivière
254 fl. 2 ½ st./2 = approx. 127 fl. |
| |
|
Ph. Groux
170 fl. 14 st. |
|
| 1581 |
- |
H. Coismans
153 fl. 10 st. |
G. Riviere
267 fl./2 = approx. 133 fl. 10 st. |
| |
|
Ph. Groux
138 fl. 10 st. |
|
| | | |
| Year |
‘Gouverneur’ |
Compositors |
Pressmen |
| 1582 |
- |
H. Coismans
186 fl. 2 st. |
G. Rivière 283 fl./2 = approx. 141 fl. 10 st. |
| |
|
Ph. Groux
198 fl. 7 st. |
|
| 1583 |
- |
H. Coismans
164 fl. 12 st. |
- |
| |
|
Ph. Groux
182 fl. 6 st. |
|
| 1584 |
- |
H. Coismans
168 fl. 11½ st.
[until 17th Nov.] |
- |
| 1585 |
- |
- |
G. Rivière
382 fl. 17½ st./2 = approx. 191 fl. |
| 1586 |
- |
H. Coismans
172 fl. 13 st. |
G. Rivière 442 fl./2 = approx. 221 fl. |
| 1587 |
H. van Millo
282 fl. 8 st. |
H. Coismans
284 fl. 13 st. |
G. Rivière
552 fl. 3 st./2 = approx. 276 fl. |
| |
|
A. Faber
237 fl. 16 st. |
|
| |
|
A. van de Velde
165 fl. 1 st. |
N. Sterck
381 fl. 2½ st./2 = approx. 190 fl. 11 st. |
| |
|
|
H. Stroishier
317 fl. 8 st./2 = approx. 157 fl. |
| |
|
|
C. van Linschoten
282 fl. 10 st./2 = approx. 141 fl. |
| | | |
It is difficult to draw useful and relevant conclusions from these divergent figures. They give the impression that until about 1580 the average annual wages of the pressmen were a little higher than those of their rather more mentally developed but physically less extended workmates, but that after 1580 the position was reversed in favour of the compositors. The marked fluctuations in the figures also make it hard to apply the upward spiral of wages in the sixteenth century, observable in Antwerp, to conditions in the Plantinian press with any precision.
The stages of the contest between rising prices and adjustments of wages in sixteenth-century Antwerp have been reconstructed along general lines.1. The great rises in prices of the first half of the century were only made good by increases in wages after relatively long intervals; the most marked took place in 1543, 1547, and 1557-62. The last of these, precipitated by the bad harvest of 1556-57, was the most important of the three and benefited the skilled workers in particular. In 1566-67 wages fell a little as a result of the political and religious troubles and the associated economic regression, but without dropping below the level of before 1557. The inflationary years 1572-74 made new adjustments in wages necessary in 1576-77. In 1577 Antwerp went over to the rebels. The Calvinists, who came to power shortly afterwards, were largely supported by the working class. They forced wage increases which were not aimed simply at compensating for the reduced purchasing power of money but had a more political character. In the years 1580-83 working men in Antwerp achieved the highest standard of living they were to experience in the sixteenth century. The capture of the city by Alexander Farnese in 1585, like the arrival of Alva twenty years earlier, brought a steep decline. Falling wages and rising prices reduced many workers to below subsistence level in 1586. But from 1587 there began to be readjustments which, while they did not catch up with prices, at least went some way towards restoring the balance.
| | | | The attempts by the Antwerp authorities to hold down wages were in fact offset by large-scale emigration. This so affected the labour market that the principle of supply and demand very soon caused wages to begin to rise again. The levels reached in about 1600 were maintained with remarkable stability until well into the eighteenth century.
In 1558, when the Plantinian wages accounts began, earnings were already at a high level and almost twice those of the first half of the century. The fall in wages in 1566-67 cannot be verified for the officina. The figures for that period and for the following years give, the impression that the fluctuations that occurred within the firm were the result not so much of changes in the general state of the Netherlands economy as of the alternating periods of expansion and contraction that the press underwent in these years. More work meant higher productivity and better wages; less work meant lower wages, even for the men who were kept on. If there were adjustments, these were bound to benefit the pressmen more than anyone else.
There is no disputing one fact: in the period 1568-72 there were social tensions within the firm that may have given rise to strikes, and at all events to friction between employer and employees.1. The years 1576-78, which brought certain improvements for the Antwerp working class as a whole, saw a sharp decline in wages in the Plantinian press. Again it was the difficulties which Plantin himself was having in keeping the press going rather than the general economic situation which determined the wages of his workmen. But from 1579 onwards, with a Calvinist regime in Antwerp, and Plantin's stabilization of his business, wages began to rise. This time it was the compositors who gained most. The siege of Antwerp (1584-85) crippled the officina, but when activities were resumed wages were not only on the high side but appear to have risen in comparison with 1580-83, and in 1587 they started on a new and pronounced upwards trend.
Thus the regression of 1585-86 seems not to have been reflected
| | | | within the firm. The wage increases of the following years appear to have been carried through earlier and more intensively there than in other Antwerp concerns. Nevertheless, Plantin's financial position was far from ideal in those years, when ‘de nostril imprimerie jadis florissante et ores flaitrissante’ was how he headed many of his letters.1. But the printer intended to stay in business. For this he needed workers - and skilled men were hard to come by in post-1585 Antwerp.
Ideas about the living standards of the workers in Antwerp after the surrender have to be somewhat revised in the light of Plantin's wage-sheets. The situation was undoubtedly catastrophic for unskilled labourers. Firms, however, that were dependent on craftsmen and wanted to stay in business had to try to counter the massive flight from Antwerp with higher wages. This probably explains why the compositors seem to have been at an advantage at this time. The differing demands made on compositors and pressmen have already been discussed and it is easy to see why it was more convenient as well as quicker to train unskilled workmen to be pressmen than compositors. This meant that the latter were relatively more valuable after the disruption of the labour market following the surrender of Antwerp in 1585.
The piece-rate system and the great fluctuations in annual pay make it also difficult to compare wages in the Plantinian firm with general Antwerp standards. However, it can be stated with some certainty that Plantin's better workmen ranked among the aristocrats of the Antwerp labour force. Their wages approached and often even exceeded those of the master masons.2. It may also be assumed that this remained true in the following centuries.
The question now arises of the relations of compositors and pressmen in the workshop itself. It has been seen that the compositors determined the rate of work to some extent. If they did not have formes ready on time the pressmen could not start work nor achieve
| | | | their usual norm - and wages. Ultimately production, and the good humour of the pressmen, depended on the compositors. A great deal of attention was paid to this aspect in the ordinances. The compositors were exhorted over and over again to have their formes ready in good time. Hours were set out carefully in the earliest regulations.1. When production began to rise and the number of men to increase, it was no longer felt so necessary to give exact hours and times. The firm became so complex that it was possible to find a stand-in or a replacement for any worker who left or was absent. All that remained was the general stipulation that the compositors should hand over their formes ‘in time and at the appointed hour’.2. But often this was easier said than done. Delay on the part of the compositors through pressure of work - or slackness - was one of the main sources
| | | | of the disputes which disturbed the peace of the printing shop. The 1715 rules make this clear enough.1. There was a remedy for slackness: fines were imposed and compensation was paid to the injured party; but this introduces the next topic, general conditions of work in the Officina Plantiniana.
| |
General working conditions
The ordinance of 1715 gives details of working hours in the firm.2. Compositors and pressmen had to be at work at six o'clock in the morning, but not earlier ‘so that any devout man may go to Mass’. Twelve noon to 1 o'clock they had off for the midday meal. From 1st April to 30th September they were allowed to work as long as it was light, but not later than 8 o'clock. From 1st October to 31st March they could work by candle-light, but knocking-off time remained at 8 o'clock. Working hours for the copperplate printers and the collators differed slightly from these. The former were free from 12 noon to half past one, while the latter also had the longer midday break and were not supposed to begin their work before 7 o'clock in the morning. This meant a 13-hour day for the compositors and pressmen, 12½ hours for the copperplate printers and 11½ hours for the collators. Work could be broken off to take a drink or have a meal. A regulation of 1642 deals with this in detail.3.
It may be assumed that in general these working hours applied in Plantin's time. The only difference was that work for some at least
| | | | of the men began at 5 o'clock in the morning. The 1563 ordinance stipulated that the pressmen had to be in the shop between 5 and 6 o'clock so as to begin work at the latter hour.1. The addendum of 1570-71 further stated that from 1st May to 1st September the ‘premier’ had to be in the printing shop at 5 o'clock ‘so as to prepare everything with diligence’.2. A later reference, to be discussed below, asserts that it was ‘the old custom’ to begin work at 5 o'clock.
In practice the masters of the Golden Compasses attached no great importance to the actual number of hours a day their men worked. The piece-rate system meant that it was in the workers interest to work as long as they were able and thus increase their norms. If the masters intervened, it was usually to establish a maximum number of working hours, or even to reduce them. The real purpose of the 1715 regulations was to ensure that the men did not start work before 6 o'clock, so that those who wanted to attend Mass were not at a disadvantage compared with their less pious mates, and to insist that the officina had to be emptied by 8 o'clock. When the workpeople expressed themselves on the subject it was not to protest against the long working hours, but to ask if they could do a little more. An undated petition from the journeymen urged that the caretaker should be allowed to let them in at 4.30, so that they could begin work punctually at five ‘for as you well know that those who work in red [i.e., on liturgical books] have to lose half a day if they by chance are quarter of an hour late getting everything ready’.3. To curb the enthusiasm of some of the men it was laid down that no one should come to work on Mondays when Fairs were held, Shrove Tuesday, or Plough Monday, the penalty being 6 st.4.
| | | |
The ordinance issued on 1st March 1703 by Anna Maria de Neuf, widow of Balthasar iii Moretus, is most revealing for the views of employers and employed on the subject.1. A drastic reduction of working hours was recommended. The midday break of one hour was retained, but work was not to be started before 7 o'clock, nor continued past 7 p.m. The aim was to keep the business going, but at a reduced tempo ‘considering the situation in these times’ - namely the economic crisis caused by the War of Spanish Succession. Anna Maria de Neuf could have sacked some of the pressmen and compositors, but for humanitarian reasons she chose to reduce the hours, and therefore the wages of everyone. She was prudent enough to provide sanctions: the threat of a 6 st. fine for any workman who might start too early or finish too late. In the regulations she was insistent that ‘this was more in the interests of the journeymen than of herself.’
Pressmen depended on compositors; pairs of journeymen had to work at each press together; the master had to supply pressmen and compositors with material. There had to be a general interdependence if the men were to achieve their desired working hours and wages, and the master his profits. It followed that those who through negligence or lack of skill held up the work to the detriment of others should lose all or some of their pay. A system of penalties and compensation was worked out, involving both master and men. For the master, too, had to accept responsibility for any failure or negligence on his part. The 1555-56 ordinance laid just as much emphasis on the duties and obligations of the employer2. as on those of the workers.3.
| | | | The 1563 rules again stressed the principle of managerial responsibility,1. but the sanctions governing the employees' obligations were more carefully defined.2. The addendum of 1570-71 took this aspect further.3. Among other things it laid down that if a pressman caused the loss of a working day, he should be liable to a fine of 1 fl., to be paid to the master, and should pay compensation of 10 st. to his mate. However, he could take one day off per week so long as he gave the master 24 hours' notice. This passage should not be interpreted as granting holidays with pay: the man lost his pay, but in
this case he did not have to pay the fine or the compensation. The wages accounts show that these precepts were applied from time to time, but it seems to the author that there was a fair amount of flexibility in practice.4.
| | | |
Penalties were imposed for other reasons too. Good order was maintained in the workshop by fines. Such penalties were for the benefit of the employees' community and will therefore be discussed in the section devoted to the Plantinian chapel. The master was also supposed to earn the good will and encourage the zeal of his work-people by paying bonuses. These too were paid not to individuals but to the representative chapel, and will also be considered below.
Only one instance has been discovered of bonuses paid in kind. In the years 1583 to 1585 sums of money paid for fish and meat were entered regularly in the memorial pour les semaines des ouvriers.1. These were probably extra rations bought specially for distribution among the men during the siege of Antwerp.2. Very occasionally Plantin paid a man who worked particularly hard, or promised to do so, in beer or wine.3.
The nature of the work in the printing office could vary considerably according to the job in hand. For the compositors in particular, each new book brought some change in their routine. In principle therefore, rates were negotiated between employer and employee, not only when a man started work with the firm, but each time work on a new book was begun.4. Moxon in 1683-84 was still advising compositors
| | | | to look carefully at every new assignment they accepted.1. Bargaining like this was appropriate in small concerns with a few journeymen, but not in larger firms employing several dozens of men and where there was a continuous flow of orders. In 1563 and 1564, when Plantin was slowly getting his reorganized business going again, he continued for some time with the tried but time-consuming methods he had followed from 1555 to 1562. But all the indications are that it was not long before he established rationalized patterns of working and standardized rates of pay. However, where particular problems arose, special discussions were still held. The decisions thus reached2. often served as precedents for a while.3. At the same time it was quite common for workmen - in practice it was always compositors - to leave the firm rather than carry out some new task on the conditions laid down by the employer.4.
Inherent in this kind of bargaining was the principle that the master was free to give particular workmen preferential treatment. Plantin himself stated this quite emphatically in ordinance D.5. However, this
| | | | particular regulation must be regarded as a sharp response on the part of the employer to the organized action of his workmen and Plantin was simply reminding them of something he had reserved the right to do. It is possible that he did on occasion exercise this right. The author is of the opinion that Guillaume Riviére, nephew of Plantin's wife and a journeyman printer in the officina from 1573 to 1588, was favoured above his workmates to some extent. Despite this instance it is probable that in practice the employer seldom exercised his prerogative in these matters and that generally the uniformity necessary to the good running of a large business prevailed. All the same, the men remained suspicious and inquisitive. In 1622 it was laid down that anyone caught eavesdropping at the door or window of the office where the master paid out the wages should incur a fine of 3 st.1.
Problems posed by resignation or dismissal were also reflected in the ordinances. In 1563 it was laid down that both had to be preceded by a month's notice on the part of employee or employer respectively.2. The 1570 rules contain a similar stipulation.3. Ordinance D, the work of an angry employer, referred to above, was much sharper in tenor. First of all it stated that the master would keep back each week one quarter of the wages of each journeyman until he held a sum of 10 to 12 fl. for each man. This measure was not altogether new. The 1563 regulation laid down that within one month each man had to deposit with the master one day's pay.4. But the amount of the deposit had now been increased to almost one month's wages. The measure was formulated as if to provide a sum of money to be held as security against the payment of any fines or damages the men might incur. It is clear from the circumstances, however, that it was intended rather to give the employer some guarantee against the too sudden departure of his men and a weapon to use against unruly elements.
| | | | Later in the text Plantin reserved for himself the right to sack refractory workers without prior notice (now reduced to two weeks on either side for normal cases) and to recover any loss or damage he might thereby incur from the deposited sum. The wages accounts show that Plantin had some reason to take this measure. Workmen often simply walked out, not only without giving notice or completing their tasks, but also without paying back money that Plantin had advanced them.1. Plantin at first seems not to have made too much of such breaches of the rules or of the financial losses he incurred. He would probably have gone on putting up with these practices if considerable social tensions had not begun to be felt in the firm about 1570, leading to strikes, or at least protest action.2. It was then that he devised this measure to make strikes and unheralded departure more difficult, and instant dismissal a real and financially palpable threat to the rebellious. In 1573 and 1574 the printer does seem to have stuck to this rule and retained parts of the wages - though seemingly much less than provided for in ordinance D.3. Later, with some lowering of the tension, the provision must have lapsed. In the wages accounts
| | | | from the earliest period, Plantin regularly commented on the reasons for his workers' departures and the manner of their going. They afford interesting glimpses of the characters and mentalities of workers of that time - at least of the more troublesome among them.1.
The ordinances illumine certain other aspects of work and conditions in the officina. In winter, work was started and concluded by candlelight and there always had to be a fire for heating the lye. Fire was therefore a constant danger. The precautions that had to be taken were set out in a special rule and backed up by the necessary sanctions.2. But not even the best preventative measures could always ward off calamity. So as to be prepared for all eventualities, a fire-pump was procured. It is not certain if it was ever used, but in 1685 detailed instructions for its operation were given.3. The cost of heating the printing shop seems to have been borne by the workpeople until well into the seventeenth century, but this expense was met out of the bonuses the master paid to the chapel.4.
| |
The apprentices
Training was required before a boy could become a pressman or compositor and to get this he served as an apprentice in an officina. The ordinances give little more than a few generalities about the apprentices and their articles, only achieving precision on the subject of the dues they owed the Plantinian chapel, of which they themselves
| | | | were not formally members.1. The wages accounts give a rather clearer picture of these pressmen and compositors to be.
There were not many of them in Plantin's time. The author has discovered twenty-three names altogether,2. although it is possible that there were some who were not entered in the books. It should be pointed out that a goodly percentage of those recorded disappeared altogether from the accounts within a matter of days, weeks, or months either of their own accord because they found the work too difficult, or because they had been dismissed by a dissatisfied employer.3. Of those who served their apprenticeship, hardly any stayed on as journeymen.4. Of the twenty-three recorded apprentices, only five wanted to be trained as compositors, the rest being ‘apprentif a la presse’.
The records are not always very detailed or clear. When in the earlier period any information is given about the length of the apprenticeship, this seems always to be restricted to two or three years both for pressmen and compositors5. - which is short compared with other crafts. Most apprentice pressmen drew a daily wage from the day they signed on. It amounted to slightly over half that paid to a trained workman, and exceeded that of the collator. If the press
| | | | they were working at exceeded the daily average output, then their pay increased accordingly.1.
In the case of the apprentice compositor Antoine Avians Plantin entered in the accounts only a few sums of money he had advanced him and the fact that the lad ‘s'en est alé et hors daprentissage et men avoit adverti par avant et estparti à mon contentement fort superbe’.2. However, under the name of Cornelis Tol Plantin noted that he had entered into an agreement on 30th July 1564 with this workman to pay him 9 st. per forme for a particular book ‘dont ie rabbatray 3 st. par iour pour Antoine apprentif auquel il doibt monstrer et gouverner’.3. Like the other apprentices, Avians was entitled to a daily amount. This was deducted from Tol's wages but not actually given to Avians, so it must have been kept by Plantin in payment for the boy's board and lodging. This entry implies that the other apprentices did not live in.
Four detailed contracts have come down from Plantin's later years. Three concern apprentice compositors who boarded with Plantin. The fourth, a rather unusual one, was drawn up on 22nd May 1579 and concerned an apprentice pressman, Abraham Smesman, son of one of Plantin's workmen.4. It appears that the young Smesman had already served six years as an apprentice with the firm. Now his father was binding him for a further two years, during which he was to live in. He was to receive more money than the ordinary apprentices: an annual wage of 30 fl. in addition to the cost of his board and lodging in the first year, and 50 fl. in the second year. These exceptional provisions may have been connected with the family circumstances of the Smesmans, or with the young man's behaviour. The stipulation ‘sans qu'il puisse aler hors de la maison sans mon congé’ may point to some sort of disciplinary measure
| | | | suggested by the father. It is worthy of note that Smesman senior cannot have been an easy gentleman to get along with: years before he had himself left the firm after a quarrel.1.
The subject of another contract, drawn up on 1st September 1578, was Robert Bruneau, son of Jacques Bruneau, choirmaster of St. Bavo's, Ghent.2. He was to receive board and lodging, but no wages. His father was to pay for his clothing. The apprenticeship was fixed at five years. If Bruneau broke the contract and left the officina before this term was up, he was to reimburse Plantin for the expenses incurred (presumably for board and lodging) at the rate of 60 fl. for the first two, and 40 fl. for the subsequent years.
The two other contracts are roughly similar. Jan Ranchart was bound apprentice pressman for four years, starting from the Feast of St. John, 1579. He was to receive board and lodging, but if he left his master before the end of his apprenticeship he must pay back the money spent on his keep, with an additional 100 fl.3. Pierre van Craesbeeck entered the Plantin house as a boarding apprentice compositor a little later than the others (probably about 1583). His apprenticeship was fixed at six years. For the first three years he received only his keep. In his fourth year he was given an additional 6 fl., then 9 fl. in his fifth, and 12 fl. in his last year.4.
The contract entered into by Jacques, or Jack Strong, son of the type-founder Thomas Strong, for a six-year apprenticeship in 1615, set out similar arrangements to the preceding ones.5. It differed only in that, at his parents' request - and, reading between the lines, as a special favour - he was to receive 10 fl. a year in addition to his keep to pay for his clothes. On 9th March 1617 Balthasar i and Jan ii Moretus agreed to Thomas Strong's request that his son's apprenticeship should be extended by one more year and that the clothing
| | | | allowance should be increased to 20 fl. However, the contract was cancelled shortly after this: ‘Depuis est fuis de la maison en Hollande, et estant de retour par commun advis de mon frère n'avons volu derechef recevoir.’1.
The contracts from 1578 and 1579 show a rather different tendency from the earlier ones, and this new tendency was to persist in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The pay made to the apprentices for their work decreased somewhat, though not by very much.2. The biggest change lay in the fact that the period of apprenticeship was increased and the lads were more strictly and formally bound to their masters, who in turn accepted greater responsibility for their welfare and education. There were no more non-resident apprentices: lodging with the master was henceforth an invariable part of the articles of apprenticeship.
The older crafts had long had articles of this kind. From the Middle Ages they had sought to limit entry to their trades - and thereby their practice - by all manner of restrictions, calculated among other things to let in no more than a few apprentices. The new printing industry, which for a long time had managed to stay outside the guild system, had not bothered much at first about these kinds of regulations. It has been seen that the apprentices of Plantin's early years were in effect young, unskilled labour. They were immediately involved in the work of the firm and thereby learnt the tricks of the trade - not much attention was given to their training, but on the other hand they earned quite good money for their age. If the Plantinian press can be taken as typical, then it was around 1578 to 1580 that the tendency towards the more traditional guild system with its stricter rules about apprenticeship began to be apparent among Antwerp printers. This may be connected with the fact that
| | | | at that time there were too many men looking for jobs and typographic output had fallen. It may also be that the Calvinist party, that took power in 1577 and leaned strongly on the members of the craft and trade guilds, had something to do with it.
|
1.For comparison: P. Chauvet, Les ouvriers du livre en France des origines à la Révolution de 1789, 1959 (also gives details of the Plantinian press taken from Rooses and from Sabbe's study, Dans les ateliers de Plantin, cited in the following note); D.T. Pottinger, The French Book Trade in the Ancien Régime 1500-1791, pp. 242 sqq.
1.The ordinances and associated documents concerning the Plantin chapel and sick fund (all in Dutch) were published with a commentary by M. Sabbe, ‘De Plantijnsche werkstede. Arbeidsregeling, tucht en maatschappelijke voorzorg in de oude Antwerpsche drukkerij,’ Verslagen en Mededeelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamsche Academie voor Taal- en Letterkunde, 1935 pp. 597-694 (also appeared separately). The commentary (without the documents) was also published in French translation: M. Sabbe, ‘Dans les ateliers de Plantin. Règlement du travail, discipline et prévoyance sociale,’ Gutenberg Jahrbuch, 1937, pp. 174-192. There is a detailed summary in English by P.J. Turner, ‘Working Conditions in the Printing Office of Christopher Plantin and the Plantin Chapel,’ Printing Review, 20, no. 75, 1959. A 1672 regulation concerning the use of fire and light in the firm was published separately by M. Sabbe, ‘In de Plantijnsche werkstede. Ordonnantie op het gebruik van vuur en licht,’ De Gulden Passer, 14, 1936, pp. 145-151. Sabbe did not give the chronology and development of the ordinances and rulings sufficient attention. This was given more detailed study by L. Voet, ‘The Printers’ Chapel in the Plantinian House, The Library, Fifth Series, 16, 1961, pp. 1-14. As these ordinances are cited continually in the following pages, it is useful to list them here with their dates; in square brackets the dates as proposed by Voet, in ordinary parentheses those given in the documents. The numbers and pages refer to Sabbe, ‘De Plantijnsche werkstede.’ - Ordinance A, pp. 637-642 [1563]; Ordinance B, pp. 643-644 [presumably 1567-1568]; Ordinance C, pp. 644-646 [ c. 1570]; Ordinance D, pp. 646-649
[1570-1572]; Ordinance E, pp. 649-650 (1642); Ordinance F, pp. 651-653 (concerns the shop, not the press; seventeenth century); Ordinance G, pp. 654-656 [1555-1556]; Ordinance H, pp. 656-657 (1751); Ordinance I, pp. 657-661 (1715); Ordinance J, pp. 661-667 (Ordinance for the compositor in the typeroom of Plantin's printing works; seventeenth century?); Ordinance K, pp. 666-667 (Ordinance for the compositors and pressmen with regard to the type-room and the compositor there; seventeenth century?); Ordinance L, pp. 667-688 (series of regulations from 1609 to 1700); Ordinance M, pp. 688-694 (statutes of the sick fund, 1653, with addenda in 1681 and 1706). For reasons that cannot be ascertained, M. Sabbe only partly published Ordinance L: he did not take it beyond 1700 although the original document (Arch. 334) continues to 1757. For the regulations drawn up by the workers themselves, united in their chapel (Ordinance L), there is a more detailed version for the years 1609-52 than the one given by M. Sabbe (Arch. 478). Arch. 334 also contains documents which Sabbe seems not to have known, or at least did not make use of Reproduction of Ord. A, plate 72.
1.Examples of impositions in: Moxon; Encyclopédie française; and McKerrow, An Introduction to Bibliography. See also Appendix 8 and plates 27-29.
3.Fairly detailed in Ordinances G (1555-1556), A (1563), I (1715), and H (1751).
4.For example, Arch. 31, f o 7 vo (Cornelis Mulener: ‘Le 6 febvrier [1564] pour la retiration de C et D entier; le 13 febvrier pour la feille de E entière; le 20 febvrier pour F entiere en Promptuariolum; le 27 febvrier pour G entière’. Thereafter Mulener was again to do one forme per sheet: ‘Le 12 mars pour 3 formes en Prompt. H.I.K.; le 19 mars pour sa part de L.M. en Prompcuariolum’).
1.For example, Arch. 3, f o 3 ro (7th November 1563: ‘J'ay payé aux deux imprimeurs pour avoir imprimé 2½ feille de Virgile à 2500... et aux deux compositeurs à chaicun.’ That is to say that two compositors had each produced half of the formes used for 2½ sheets of the Virgil; which can only mean the formes for the work and back. Similar reference, also in connexion with the Virgil, in Arch. 3, f o 3 vo (14th November 1563). Cf. also preceding note.
2.As detailed by Moxon, op. cit., pp. 239 sqq.
3.Cf. p. 346, note 4 (Fine to be paid by the compositor J. Roche à cause de deux pages mal comptées). See also p. 314.
2.Corr., VIII-IX, no. 1336 (Plantin to V. de Zeelandre, 26th December 1587: ‘J'ay incontinent ordonné a tant d'ouvriers que possible a esté pour y besongner nuict et jour à doubles gages.’ These workmen were compositors as well as printers.) An instance of this is possibly Arch. 31, f o 30 ro: ‘[Hendrik Meyer, 3rd March 1571] il a composé outre sa tache ordinaire dix pages de Biblia Panigni à 22 st. la page: 11 fl.’
1.It is not always easy to derive precise data from the mostly brief information given in the wages accounts. The author has confined himself to a number of samples, using only those about which there can be no doubt.
2.Arch. 35, f o 160 vo: ‘A Cornelis [Kiliaan] pour 3 formes du Diurnale: 1 fl. 10 st.; A Pierre dela Porte pour 3 formes Diurnale: 1 fl. 16 st.’
3.Arch. 3, f o 16: on 5th February 1558 P. de la Porte and Cornelis diet Special [i.e., Kiliaan] were paid ‘pour 24 pages composees du journal en 24 lectre non pareille: 18 fl.’ ‘Page’ is here probably the same as forme. So for this work Plantin paid 15 st. per forme.
4.Arch. 3, f o 2 vo: ‘Corneille Mullener de marché faict avec luy aura pour chacunne forme de telle lectre in 16 o comme est le Virgile sans autres additions que de tels cifres qui sont sur la marge dud[ict] livre qui est par luy commencé aura 12 st. pour chacunne forme entière et si ie luy bailie ouvraige pareille et de telle sorte de lectre où il y ait additions il en aura 7½ st. pour la demye fourme qui seroit 15 st. pour la forme entière preste à imprimer.’ Arch. 31, f o 7 vo has a more condensed form of this agreement (‘...doibt avoir pour telle ouvrage que le Virgile commencé 12 st. pour chacunne forme et si ie luy bailie ouvrage où il y ait additions il aura 15 st. pour la forme’). That is to say 12 st. a forme, but when the work was complicated by additions etc., 15 st. a forme. In November 1563 Plantin regularly paid 12 st. a forme to the two compositors who worked on the Virgil (Arch. 3, f os 3 ro and 3 vo).
5.Arch. 31, f o 33 vo (1565: Laurent Soter).
6.Arch. 31, f o 16; cf. also f o 124 (Lindanus, Apologeticum), f o 99 (Justus Lipsius, Variae Lectiones).
2.Arch. 697, no. 192. In brackets, the amount paid for the ‘voorbladers’ (first pages).
1.Cf. pp. 336-338. Which is not to say that in certain circumstances (e.g., service books or larger runs) the pressmen could not have earned more than the compositors. In November 1563 for the printing of 2½ sheets of the Virgil (in a run of 2,500 copies) the two pressmen received respectively 2 fl. and 1 fl. 17½ st., and the two compositors 1 fl. 15 st. each (12 st. for each forme).
2.This is clear from the payment by the masters of the Gulden Passer of bonuses due to the ‘compagnie des imprimeurs’ (the chapel) and which were reckoned per working press (cf. pp. 365-366): in this connexion there is regular mention of a half press.
1.In this case it was assumed that the pressman, who was in default through negligence or carelessness, or who had some setback, must perform a task which was normally reserved for the compositor - unless he could persuade his workmate to help him out.
2.As was more strongly emphasized in the 1751 ordinance.
3.As further specified in the article (no. 5) the formes could not be kept locked because otherwise force would have been necessary to push in the projecting type.
4.‘But reasonably, according to the demands of time and the nature of the paper.’ As the water should be given time to soak the paper, the wet heaps of paper could not be turned too quickly: not until the following day or at least after some time had elapsed (Art. 6).
5.Each of the pressmen had to stoke the furnace in turn and in good time, so that the lye would be boiling properly when the ‘red’ or ‘black’ formes were put in to be washed. The formes had to soak in the hot lye long enough to make washing quicker and easier. It was forbidden to try to scrub the formes clean with a brush; this was ineffective and damaged the type (Art. 7).
6.Art. 8 (cf. p. 49, note 2).
7.With the hand on the end of the lever, not in the middle (Art. 8).
8.To achieve clean work it was stipulated that no forme should be imposed when backing up without stretching the linen cloths on the tympan, and these cloths had to be washed when dirty (Art. 8).
9.To allow the ink to spread evenly, the ink balls must not be made too big; the wool in the ink balls must be properly fluffed up (Art. 10). For the other stipulations concerning ink balls cf. p. 320,
note 3.
2.Mechanick Exercises, p. 309.
3.Those who ‘worked in large numbers’ (i.e., those printing large runs), had to fluff up the wool halfway through the job and renew the ink balls; they also had to do this every time that the leather covers began to get dry (Art. 10).
4.In 1837 in France correcting proofs in galley was noted as a very recent innovation: D.T. Pottinger, The French Book Trade in the Ancien Régime 1500-1797, pp. 52-53.
2.As was specified in the regulations of 1555-56, 1563 (Art. 13) and 1751 (Art. 3).
5.Correction stones, however, are not mentioned in the detailed accounts of 1563-67.
7.And not a press which happened not to be in use. In 1639 Balthasar I Moretus ordered that none of the men should despoil a ‘hoogstaande’ press of its component parts or alter it so that it could not be used for pulling proofs, and this carried a fine of 24 st. (Ord. L., Art. 57). What ‘hoogstaand’ means exactly in this context is not clear; possibly the same as a ‘klaarstaande’ [standing ready] press. In the same year it was laid down that no one should dismantle a ‘leegstaande’ [standing empty] press, but the fines threatening offenders were much less than in the preceding case, namely 6 st. (Ord. L, Art. 58 and 59). The ‘leegstaande’ presses must have been ones that happened to be idle.
1.An Introduction to Bibliography, pp. 329 sqq.
2.Mechanick Exercises, p. 336.
1.Hellinga, Copy and Print, p. 153 - referring to figures 52 and 53 in his work- asserts that in Plantin's officina first the black and then the red text was printed. A close examination of the 1572 Missale, which Hellinga used as an example, and other liturgical works printed by Plantin in these years, brought the author to the opposite conclusion. In fact, Hellinga himself later states, in his comments on figure 52, that the red text was printed before the black.
3.Ord. A. (1563), Art. 12: ‘De ghene die het regiment der perssen van den Meester bevolen is, die sal den schoondruck op draghen, ende den wederdruck af trecken: ende alle het werck van synder perssen verantwoorden’ (whoever is appointed by the Master to have charge of the press shall put up the first sheets and print the turn sheets: and shall answer for all the work of his press). In Art. 15 the ‘master of the press’ is made responsible for pulling proofs. In Ord. C (1570-71), Art. 6, the ‘premier of the press’ is instructed to be present at 5 o'clock in summer and at 6 in winter ‘so as to prepare everything with diligence’, while the others (the seconds and possibly the compositors) had to be there as the occasion demanded.
1.Some more attention, however, had to be paid to the publications set in small type - and according to Plantin's note, quoted on p. 326, note 2, for such work in small type a little extra was paid. This attitude of valuing the pressmen's achievements seems to have remained unchanged in the Officina Plantiniana throughout the centuries. In other printing offices this problem used to be approached from a different point of view: the printing of large formes in small type was usually far better paid for than the printing of small formes in large type. According to a communication from Mr. Philip Gaskell, thepressmenat Cambridge University Press around the year 1700 - when they were paid an hourly rate - received a supplement of 50 per cent on their wages for printing a duodecimo set in Long Primer as compared to a quarto set in English (Augustyn).
2.Arch. 31, f o 45 vo: ‘Guerard Guerlins s'est accordé avec moy de besongner à la presse... et sera payé comme un compagnon franc de ce qu'il imprimera outre la iournée accoustumée qui est de 2,500 [altered to 1,250] sans les feilles imperfections.’ The date of this note is difficult to ascertain; possibly 1565-67.
3.Except for the service books in red and black, where the payment was often reckoned per forme. For example, Arch. 32, f o 3 (Missale Romanum, 1571). Cf. also p. 327, note 6 and 7.
1.Arch. 31, f o 4 vo: on 19th March 1564 Benedict Wertlaw, ‘premier’, was paid the sum of 2 fl. 5 st. ‘pour 6 iournées en Tomus I. Com[mentarii] Galeni 9 feilles.’ On 22nd April followed payment ‘pour 21 formes en Comment, in Gal. qui font 7 iournées’ of an unspecified sum; however, comparison with other amounts received by Wertlaw and the money paid to the ‘second’ for the work done on 22nd April (L. Hallin, Arch. 31, f o 32 vo: 2 fl. 9 st.), puts it at 2 fl. 12½ st. In both cases the rate of work came to 1½ sheets (or 3 formes) per day. The Commentarii in Galeni Opera had a run of 800 copies. The amount paid per sheet was then only 5 st., but by imposing 1½ sheets per day the ‘premier’ and his ‘second’ could manage to print at a rate of 1,200 per day and so get a day's wages of respectively 7½ st. and 7 st. This can be taken as the normal daily rate in this period (cf. note 2).
2.Rooses, Musée, pp. 162-163 gives a ‘note d'un des registres de Plantin’ which the author has not been able to locate in the archives, but which is important to the question: ‘Les imprimeurs gaignent ordinairement pour leur salaire comme suit: formes in -12 o, in -8 o, in -folio, de papier commun jusques au petit bastard, et ledit bastard aussi, à 1250, avec la main pour les imperfections, 7 patars [= st.] par jour et s'entend aussi de lettres grosses et menues jusques au colineus, car aultrement estant de nonpareille Bréviaire, et coronel
ils ont quelque chose davantage selon la besogne et l'accord.’
3.As clearly indicated in the entry about the contract with the apprentice printer Gerard Guerlins, reproduced in p. 325, note 2: ‘et sera payé comme un compagnon franc de ce qu'il imprimera outre la iournée accoustumée’.
5.Cf. M. Pollak, ‘The performance of the wooden printing press’, The Library Quarterly, 42, 1972, pp. 218-264.
6.As appears from the wages per annum: cf. pp. 336-338.
2.Arch. 3, f o 1 vo: ‘Nicolas Sterck imprimeur de marché faict avec luy imprimera 2 rames de papier tel quest le Virgile in -16 o par nous commencé pour 6½ st. et est premier cest a dire gouverneur de la presse... Martin Gilles imprimeur pour second à la presse avec led[ict] Nicolas et imprimera aussi de marché faict avec luy 2 rames pour 6 st., soit avec additions ou non’. The agreement between Plantin and the two journeymen printers consequently stated that, for a job in the nature of the Virgil, reckoned on the basis of a run of 1,000, the ‘premier’ would receive 6½ st. and the ‘second’ 6 st. In fact 2,500 copies of the Virgil were printed bringing the men respectively 16 st. and 15½ st. (Arch. 3, f os 3 ro and 3 vo). Cf. also Arch. 31, f o 27 vo.
4.Arch. 31, f o 4 vo (Benedict Wertlaw, ‘premier’).
5.Arch. 31, f o 28 vo (Nicolas Sterck, ‘premier’). Difficult job because of the illustrations.
6.Liturgical work in red and black: reckoned per forme (i.e., 12 st. for the premier) (Arch. 31, f o 160 vo).
7.Liturgical work in red and black: to the ‘premier’ (working with an apprentice), reckoned per forme (Arch. 32, f o 4).
8.To the ‘premier’: Arch. 32, f o 4.
10.Arch. 697, no. 192. In brackets the amounts paid for the ‘voorbladers’ (first pages).
1.Corr., I, no. 34 (Plantin to Molina, 7th June 1567: ‘... n'eust esté que pour fournir vostre nombre demandé [of a Horae Beatissimae Virgimis Marine] de 1250 ou de 1500, il m'a faillu faire double journée, à cause que nos imprimeurs me veulent faire pour jour que 1000 de rouge et noir’). See also in this context the letter to Cardinal Granvelle, 26th March 1569, quoted in p. 169, note 7.
2.Cf. also the letter of Plantin to Aguilar, 29th June 1573 ( Corr., III, no. 477, p. 337) where he explains that with three presses he would print 1500 sheets a day of the breviary in folio, thus inferring an output of 500 sheets per press and per day (‘1500 Bréviaires in f o d'Espagne j'estime à 300 feilles et à trois presses seroit 30 feilles par mois qui seroit dix mois soubs la presse faisant 1500 pour jour’).
3.Ord. I, Art. 13 (cf. p. 343).
1.Ord. L, Art. 99 (under 1688).
3.As opposed to extra hands hired to do a certain amount of collating. See text, immediately below.
4.For the wages that Plantin paid out in 1566 to the collators see Appendix 1. These amounts were not recorded in the wages accounts.
3.Such as sweeping the workshop (cf. p. 329).
4.Arch. 31, f o 100 vo, under the heading ‘ouvriers divers’, workers who, in temporary employment, had done odd jobs (including, besides collating, crushing vermilion).
5.Possibly the son of Hans van Loeven Helsvir (from 1567 employed as a journeyman printer in the Plantin house), who afterwards went to Holland and there founded the famous printing dynasty.
6.For the period 1563-67 the author has found only one other reference to the collators and their earnings (apart from the entries bearing on Louis Elsevier and his colleagues and on the apprentice pressman de Villenfagne [see p. 331, note 2]) but the job itself was not specified: Arch. 3, f o 51 vo, 8th June 1566: ‘Laurent Sebastian pour 12 semaines à 25 st. semaine: 15 fl.; A Paul de Vos qui devoit estre apprentif pour aussi 10 semaines à 20 st. par semaine: 10 fl.’
1.As was the case with the ‘ouvriers divers’ to whom L. Elsevier belonged. A similar temporary collator was Cornelis Hercules, employed from 7th December [1569?] until 9th February [1570?] (Arch. 31, f o 58 ro); he drew weekly wages, usually more than 1 fl. and reckoned on the basis of the amount of work done; thus on 15th December he earned 1 fl. 4½ st. for collating 49 reams (30 reams Concordantiae, 10 reams Breviarium, 9 reams in Leviticum), on 22nd December, 19½ st. for 39 reams (20 reams Concordantiae, 9 reams Missale, 10 reams Montanus), on 9th February, 1 fl. 3 st. for 46 reams (18 reams Missale, 10 reams Concordantiae, 18 reams Biblia).
2.In 1566 G. de Villenfagne, apprentice printer, occasionally alternated his work at the press with collating: on 20th July he was paid 6 st. ‘pour assembler’ during 1½ days, and on 9th August 10 st. for 2½ days (Arch. 31, f o 41 ro). The pressman Abraham van Arendonck received on 21st May 1569 ‘pour 4 iournées d'assembler’ 1 fl., i.e., 5 st. per day (Arch. 31, f o 36).
4.Arch. 788 ( Semaines des ouvriers, 1583-89): this daughter, whose name was not given, is mentioned practically every week from nth June 1583 until 13th October 1584; after that again on 26th January 1585. In contrast to her father, who received a fairly regular weekly wage (3 fl. until April 1584, after that 3 fl. 12 st.), the daughter was paid for carefully defined jobs. Her work is not indicated in the Livre des ouvriers for this period (Arch. 33).
1.Ord. J., Art. 3. This type-room was then in the ‘little house over the canal’ (cf. Vol. I, p. 293).
3.Arch. 31, f os 21 vo 23 ro.
4.Arch. 31, f os 23 ro and 118 vo-120 ro.
6.And possibly even earlier: in 1558 Cornelis Kiliaan was charged with the care of the type material (cf. p. 176, note 3).
1.For the annual wages of ‘ordinary’ compositors, see pp. 336-338.
1.On 7th November and 14th November 1563, for example, Plantin paid wages to two pressmen and two compositors for completing 5 sheets of the 16mo Virgil (Arch. 3, f os 3 ro and 3 vo).
2.Cf. p. 328: on average 500 sheets for the liturgical works as compared to 1,250 sheets for the ordinary editions.
1.After the table in R. de Roover, ‘The business organisation of the Plantin Press in the setting of sixteenth-century Antwerp’, Gedenkboek der Plantindagen, 1956, p. 239. The table gives the proportions at the beginning of each year (January).
2.Cf. R. de Roover, op. cit., pp. 243-244.
1.Cornelis Tol, compositor, working for Plantin since 28th November 1564, ‘est venu [on 6th February 1565] à despens avec moy et me doibt payer chaicunne semaine 20 st.’ (Arch. 31, f o 8 vo); Josse Mersman, compositor ‘est venu [on 1st October 1576] demeurer à despens avec nous à 50 fl. par an’ (Arch. 32, f o 248).
2.Jacques Roche, compositor: on 1st November 1563 ‘faict marché avec luy de le nourrir et coucher et luy donner 15 st. par chacunne semaine’ (Arch. 31, f o 20 vo); Louis Soter, compositor, working for Plantin since 22nd April 1564; on 10th November: ‘de compte faict il a demeuré ceans 3 semaines et ie luy ay accordé avec ses despens de luy donner 2 fl. 8 st.; le 25 Novembre luy ay presté sur ladvenir 2 fl. 2 st.; le 16 Decembre 20 st.; le 5 Janvier payé 6 fl. à condition quil me demandera plus dargent devant Pasques’ (Arch. 31, f o 33 vo).
3.Compiled from the ‘livres des ouvriers’: Arch. 31 (1563-1574), 32 (1571-1579), 33 (1580-1590).
4.He left the officina on 30th August to become a ‘soudard’ (mercenary); on 29th September he was back at work.
1.Became a ‘premier’ on 10th March.
1.E. Scholliers, Loonarbeid en honger. De levensstandaard in de XVe en XVIe eeuw te Antwerpen, 1960, pp. 123 sqq.
1.Cf. Vol. I, pp. 113 sqq.
2.Cf. the data in E. Scholliers, ‘Prijzen en lonen te Antwerpen (15 e en i6 e eeuw)’, Dokumenten voor de geschiedenis van prijzen en lonen in Vlaanderen en Brabant (XVe-XVIIIe eeuw), 1959.
1.Ord. C. (1555-56): ‘Item, dat de setters hun formen sullen leveren ghereet snoenens ten XII hueren, ende alst root en swart is ten XI hueren, oft daer na, op de verbeurte van een cruycxken te betalen.’ (Item, that the type-setters should deliver their formes ready at twelve noon, and if it be ‘red and black’ at eleven o'clock, or [soon] thereafter, on penalty of a jug [of beer]); Ord. A. (1565), Art. 10: ‘En yeghelijk setter... sal ghehouden sijn de forme alle daghen over te leveren, om de eerste proeve daer op te maken (die sdaechs daer na ghedruct sal moeten worden) een ure na dat de Drucker sijn ghedructe forme over ghelevert heeft: dwelck nochtans niet en gheschiedt voor elf uren van den voorgaenden dach, ende die selvighe forme al ghecorrigeert ten seven ure des avonts om een revisie te maken. Des ghelijcx de forme die begost sal moeten worden op den middach, sal moeten 'tsavonts daer voor ghereet sijn om de eerste proeve daer op te maken; ende dat, een ure na dat de Drucker sijn gedructe forme sal overghelevert hebben: so dattet nochtans niet en gheschiede voor vijf uren tsavonts: ende de selvighe al gecorrigeert tsanderdaechs ten twelf uren om een revisie te maken. Op de pene van 3 stuyvers.’ (And every type-setter... shall be required to hand over the forme every day for the first proof to be pulled [which shall be printed on the day after that] one hour after the pressman has delivered his printed forme: which does not take place before eleven o'clock on the previous day, and that same forme [is to be] wholly corrected by seven o'clock in the evening for
the printing of a new proof. Likewise the forme that is to be printed at midday must be ready the evening before for the first proof to be pulled; and this one hour after the pressman has delivered his printed forme: which will not be before five o'clock in the evening: and the same wholly corrected on the day afterwards by twelve o'clock for a new proof. On penalty of 3 stuivers.)
2.Ord. C. (1570-71), Art. 5: ‘De setters... sijn schuldich den Proeven in tijts, ende op een ghesette ure te leveren, op verbeurte van eenen stuyver, ende te moeten verbeteren.’ (The compositors... are responsible for handing over the proofs in time and at the appointed hour, on penalty of one stuiver, and for correcting them.)
1.Ord. I, Art. 12: ‘Ende om te voorkomen den twist ende tweedracht tusschen de Lettersetters en Druckers, uyt redene dat den Letter-setter door zijne swaere copye met sijne vorme somtijts niet en can bycomen...’ (And to prevent discord between the compositors and pressmen, because the compositor sometimes cannot be on time with his forme because of difficult copy...)
2.Ord. I, Art. 13. For comparison: details of French practice (generally from 5 a.m. to 8 p.m.) in Febvre & Martin, L'apparition du livre, p. 198.
3.Ord. E. This lays down (1) that the journeymen, so long as they did it singly, could eat and drink whenever they were hungry or thirsty; (2) that they could join together in groups of not more than three or four men, from 8 to 9 a.m. and from 4 to 5 p.m., each man being allowed to drink one pot of beer; (3) that all of them were allowed to eat and drink together on certain feast-days; (4) that those who stayed in the press during the midday break could join together from noon till 1 p.m. and each drink a mug of beer. Other regulations in this ordinance provide for visits by friends and how they should be entertained; what should be done when strangers came to see the printing office in the hours when sitting together was permitted; the methods for a general distribution of beer
(for a bienvenue, for example).
2.Ord. C, Art. 6. See also p. 324, note 3.
3.Arch. 120, p. 291. Text reproduced by Sabbe in ‘De Plantijnsche werkstede,’ p. 620.
4.Ord. L., Art 112 (under 1699)
2.Ord. G; thus it was stipulated that the master ‘on penalty of a jug of beer’ should provide the journeymen with the leather, the lye, and other equipment that pressmen and compositors needed, especially for red-and-black service books, and should maintain all the customs of the printing office (i.e., the regular payment of all the bonuses to which the journeymen had claim). On ‘penalty of compensating whoever experienced loss therefrom’ he had to read proofs in good time, or have them read, so that the pressmen were not kept waiting.
3.There were penalties for compositors who left printer's pie about over a Sunday or feastday, who did not hand over their formes punctually, who did not store everything away carefully when ‘dissing’, who did not collect up type when leaving on Saturday; for the pressmen who did not impose the formes in good time (presumably for proof-pulling), who removed leather (from ink-balls) when it could still be used, who wasted ink or left the container uncovered on Saturday evening. Apart from the prompt handing over and imposing of formes, these regulations were concerned only with prevention of waste, not with liability to pay
compensation.
1.Ord. A, Art. 17: ‘Item de Meester sal ghehouden sijn int werck te onderhouden alle de ghesellen op behoorlijcke werckdagen: oft haerlieden voor elcken dach te gheven vijf stuyvers: ten gheviel datter eenich dinck brake, daervan het werck soude moghen gestaect worden twee oft drie daghen. Ende waert dat den tijt langher geviele om de ghebroken ghereetschap te vermaken, so sal hij den ghesellen na den derden dach ander werck gheven, oft haerlieden van elcke dachhuere na de derden dach vier stuyvers gheven.’ (Item the Master is required to provide all the journeymen with work for the proper days or give them five stuivers each day when work has to be stopped for two or three days because something has been broken. And if it takes longer for the broken gear to be repaired, then he shall give the journeymen other work after the third day, or give them four stuivers every day after the third.)
2.Art. 6: ‘Everyone must carry out and complete his task each day on penalty of 5 st. to be paid to each man who has suffered detriment thereby and 6 st. to the master for a press that is stopped one whole day, and 3 stuivers for half a day.’
3.Ord. C, Art. 5 (compositors had to hand over their proofs punctually on penalty of 1 St., and to correct them); Art. 6 (pressmen - see text following).
4.Examples: (1) Error by a compositor effecting a pressman, Arch. 35, f o 160 ro, 19th February 1558, ‘A Jan Roche pour une feille du Journal et la faute que fait Pierre de la Porte à ne livrer sa forme qui a esté faute de demye journée que j'ay payé ce nonobstant... A Pierre de La Porte payé 4 jours combien quil ne luy en faut que 3 et encore doibt payer 6 st. pour les imprimeurs sil ne leur fait faire demye journée’; (2) Idem, Arch. 31, f o 9 vo: Claude Pain, pressman, 12th Dec. 1563, ‘pour 4 journées au Virgile dont en y a demye iournée sur Corneille Meulener compositeur pour faute d'avoir composé lune forme pour lautre’ (Under Cornelis Mulener - Arch. 31, f o 7 vo - is entered for 12th Dec. simply ‘payé pour tout 1 fl. 4 st.’, this being 6 st. less than the week before, and on 19th Dec. 1563 ‘pour 5½ journées dont yen une ½ journée de perte faute de navoir livré leur forme au commencement du livre de Respon. ad Articulos etc.’); (3) Idem, Arch. 31, f o 20 vo:Jacques Roche, compositor, 9th Nov. 1563, ‘2 st. [advanced by Plantin] pour payer 2 pots de biére en satisfaction de demye heure du temps perdue par les imprimeurs à cause de deux pages mal comptées par luy quil refist etc’; (4) Pressman absent through drunkenness, Arch. 32, f o 165 (a misplaced pasted-in sheet: it belongs with f o 248 and relates to Josse Smesman); memorandum by Martina Plantin, 7th June [1557?]: ‘Item si au cas Josse falle [faille] quelque iournée par
ifrongerie [ivrognerie] quiel [qu'il] faudra quiel paie toutte les journées quiel a perdu et perdra au double mais si au cas quiel ajeve [achéve] son année sans perdre journée nulle mon pére luy pradonne [pardonne] tout; sur cela luy ayge [ai-je] donné 20 fl. le 7 Juien’; (5) Negligence by the master, Arch. 32, f o 13 ro: Reinier Aertsen, pressman, 11th Aug. 1571, ‘Et payé par faute qu'il n'a eu formes assés: 10½ st.’
1.Arch. 788 (journeymen's weekly wages, 1583-89).
2.It is, however, nowhere explicitly stated that these were actually shared out; they could, in fact, have been purchased for Plantin's family.
3.Arch. 33, f o 5: Claes van Linschoten, pressman, May 1573, ‘Accordé à 50 st. la feille et luy donner pour ung pot de vin à la fin dudict Breviaire’; Arch. 33, f o 128: Hans van Millo, compositor, 24th July 1587, ‘pour ung pot de vin auls messes, 4 fl. 10 st.’
4.See especially Arch. 3 and Arch. 31.
1.Mechanick Exercises, p. 203.
2.Cf. Arch. 32, f o 15 (H. van Mello, compositor), 40 (F. Conraets, compositor), 106 (M. van de Broeck, pressman), 107 (H. Claes, pressman).
3.E.g., Arch. 697, no. 192. Wages paid to compositors and pressmen, eighteenth century; a note was inserted concerning the rates for the compositors working on the folio maximo Missale Romanum: ‘Vermits in grooter formaat ende letter en door doverloopen en andere moijelijckheden is door mijnheer saliger toegestaan 1 fl. 15 st. p[er] blad met conditie dat alswanneer naemaels sal herdruckt worden den loon eenigermate sal gemodereert worden vermits het setten alsdan soo moyelijck niet sal wesen.’ (As it is in larger format and type-size and because of the turn-over and other difficulties the late master has allowed 1 fl. 15. st. per sheet on condition that if the work be later reprinted the wages shall be a little modified since setting will not then be so difficult.)
4.Arch. 31, f o
95 vo (Otto Pasch; ‘Et sen est alé [allé] le 20 Novembre [1566] pour navoir voulu achever de composer Magia Nat. 16 o à 20 st. la forme comme de coustume, in Epist. Cic. ad Atticum pour 14’; he later returned); Arch. 32, f o 118 (Hans Vrints; ‘Le 22 May [1573] il sen est alé à cause quil ne vouloit pas estre content de besongner au petit missal in 4 to pour le prix accordé avec ceux qui y avoient besongné...’); Arch. 32, f o 160 (Nicolas Horsver, 27th April 1575: ‘Il sen est alé pour navoir pas voulu besongner in Operibus S. Augustini à 10 st. la forme.’)
5.‘The master shall negotiate the wages for a work with each journeyman separately: without comment or reproach from anyone that one man might have less or more for a task than the others.’
2.Ord. A, Art. 6. What provision was made for non-observance by the master of this rule is not specified. On at least one occasion compensation was paid to the workman concerned: Arch. 31, f o 41 vo (Jehan de Wilde, pressman, 17th March 1565: ‘Je luy ay donné congé et donné 2 fl. ascavoir 15 st. quil me devoit et 25 st. en argent contant à cause que ie luy donne congé sans luy avoir adverti par avant.’)
1.For example Arch. 31, f o 1 vo (Andries Verscaut, compositor, 9th Sept. 1564: ‘Il sen est alé sans me payer nonobstant qui ie luy aye refusé dattendre de mon payement et me doibt 28 st. de compte faict avec luy’, but on 20th March 1565 Verscaut was again in service); f o 4 vo (Benedict Wertlaw, compositor, 26th May 1564: ‘... et luy disant à ma coustume que ie voulois avoir bonne besongne et me disant quil ne pouvoit mieux et quil nen scavoit faire autre chose il sen est parti de mon logis et me doict pour 5 st. de biere’); f o 9 vo (Claude Pain, pressman, 15th July 1564: Il sen est alé sans men avoir adverti autrement quen venant quérir son argent, quil ma dict avoir trouvé maistre et lavoir caché [de] peur de demeurer entre deux selles Ie cul à terre etc. et si me doibt dargent presté iusques ce iourdhuy 9 fl. 5¾ St.); f o 17 ro (Henri Smesman, pressman, 11th Jan. 1567: ‘Il s'en est alé sans mavoir adverti nullement... encore a il laissé une retiration à faire de la Bible Hebraicque in -16 o que Louys a achevé 3 iours après son partement et si me doibt 25 st.’); f o 34 ro (Laurent Soter, compositor, 11th Jan. 1566; ‘Il sen est alé sans mavoir adverti que deux iours devant. Toutefois ie ne men suis
gueres malcontente’).
3.Cf. Arch. 32, f o 129 (Henri van Martens, pressman, 22nd April 1574: ‘payé les 23 st. quon luy avoit rabbatus depuis quil estoit venu besongner ceans [11th July 1573] et dautant quil faisoit coustume de laisser la besongne sans men advertir après les avoir reprins plusieurs fois et adverti de se retirer de ceans ie len ay envoyé led[ict] iour’; on 8th May 1574 back at work, until 11th July 1574); f o 155 vo (Marc Mettes, pressman, in service from 3rd March 1574; on 7th July 1574 ‘payé net cela quon luy avoit retins qui estoit 13½ st. Item 1½ iour de 13½ st. rouge et noir ensemble 27 st. que ie luy ay payés net et luy avois donné congé passé long temps à cause qu'il ne me pouvoit faire bonne besongne car il faisoit moins et pastes comme on dict et ne pouvoit tirer assés ferme la presse’).
1.Cf. p. 350, note 1 and 3. Other examples: Arch. 31, f o 25 vo (Michel Mayer, compositor, 11th June 1564: ‘Ledict Michel est allé aus bordeaux et sy est tenu frequentant iceux le dimenche, lundi, mardi et mercredi, puis le ieudi matin sen est venu coucher sur un coffre en la chambre oú il couchoit ordinairement et Corneille Tol et Gilles et Antoine estant levés il a faict son pacquet et sen est allé sans dire adieu à nulluy de ceans’; he was back in service on 1st Dec. 1565); Arch. 32, f o 127 ro (Hans van Leuven Elzevier, pressman, 20th May 1574: ‘il sen est alé par mon congé à cause qu'il ne sestoit pas gouverné selon nostre ordonnance de limprimerie et ce principalement en besongner continuellement aux iours ouvrables esquels il sest souvent debauché à boire et enjurer par quoy ie lay envoyé hors de mon logis’).
2.Published separately by Sabbe: cf. p. 310, note 1.
1.Ord. G (1555-56): the apprentice must wait on the journeymen if there is no one else there; he must sweep the printing shop every Sunday; he must not be disrespectful to the journeymen. The use of the singular in the three rules indicates that there was then only one apprentice; he was available on Sundays and therefore boarded with the master. Ord. A (1563), Art. 18 (payments of bienvenues). Ord. B (1567), Art. 20 (conferring of freedom on apprentices).
2.For the period 1563-69 (some of them in service from before 1563 until, or after, 1570), 7; 1570-80, 15; 1581-89, 3. Details in Arch. 31, f os 41, 46, 47, 62, 114, 147, 153, 162; Arch. 32, f 05 40, 84, 90, 94, 126, 130, 206, 228, 268; Arch. 33, f os 1, 8, 13, 39, 156. In one case (Jean Ranchart), noted by Rooses, Musée, p. 163, the author has not been able to find the archives reference.
3.E.g., Arch. 31, f o 61 vo (Paulus de Vos entered service 11th May [?]; last payment 25th May [?] and note: ‘Je lay envoyé hors du logis parce quil estoit plain [plein] de mauvaises et vilaines paroles et gluant de mains’).
4.One exception was Pierre van Craesbeeck (Arch. 33, f o 1) discussed in the text immediately following.
5.Cf. Arch. 31, f os 41 (3 years), 46 (2 years), 114 (2 years), 147 (2 years), 162 (3 years); Arch. 32, f o 94 (2 years; last entry of this kind: 1572).
1.Cf. the text quoted on p. 325, note 2. Slightly differently formulated in the agreement of 21st June 1572 with Hart Motten, who was to receive 5 st. ‘pour 2500 [sheets] qui est 1 st. pour les 500 et ainsi à l'advenant.’ His usual weekly wage in 1572 was 1 fl. 10 st. (Arch. 32, f o 90).
1.In Jan. 1567: Arch. 31, f o 17 ro. Cf. p. 350, note 1.
3.According to Rooses, Musée, p. 163. The author has not been able to trace the relevant document in the archives.
4.Arch. 33, f o 1. His date of entry into service is not recorded, but he was paid as a compositor from 27th Oct. 1589 onwards.
1.Ibid. Later Strong worked as a type-founder for the firm, like his father. After a time he absconded, leaving a large debt unpaid (cf. p. 109).
2.Antoine Avians, an apprentice compositor in 1564-65, and the only one then living in, had received no cash payments, Plantin retaining the lad's contractual wages to pay for his keep (cf. above, p. 353). In this respect there was little or no difference in conditions between the boarding apprentices of the early and later years of Plantin's career.
|
|